About your Search

20121225
20121225
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
to gather. what happened? guest: i am surprised. upper income people voted for president obama. what is clear and true is if you look at white men, white men are overwhelmingly the single group of americans that is most antagonistic toward president obama. i think he got 30% + of white men to vote for him. he was down in those categories, but white men are the heart and soul of it. you say he is the most divisive. i think we live in very divisive times in terms of our politics, in terms of our media spending it is highly polarized here in the congress. people who do not want to compromise see compromise as a dirty word and are worried they are threatened by the other side spending the whole idea of politics having to see good in the other side and were there is possibility of common ground has gone away. i do not think you are wrong in saying that president obama's era is one of the most divisive in american history and i question whether or not he has a divisive personality. i think his approval ratings in terms of -- he is close to 50%. personally, there are lots of americans inclu
what you think barack obama is going to go to the house and senate democrats and say i need a yes vote on this. instead of dealing with the fact that the president of the united states is once again totally failing to provide leadership, the president has gotten us worried about whether grover norquist defines the republican party. as we know, if we are not worthy of the news media's respect and love we are a party that disappear. listen to the tone of the language when you watch the morning joe or, you know, "fox & friends." are often the whole thing and i want to make two points and the norquist. he did something important. he came up with the idea a no tax increase pledge as a way of drawing a line in the sand. let me be clear about my background. i voted under the tax increase in reagan. i say this in the reagan library. i voted against the tax increase of george h. w. bush. when i thought it was a disaster. when he balance the budget for four straight years, we did it by cutting taxes to accelerate economic growth. i clearly represent a different view. [laughter] but i have no pro
. on november 4 before the election, you posted on facebook, "why would anyone jobless today vote to maintain the status quo instead of change? unemployment is still higher than four years ago." what are your thoughts on president obama's re-election, i would say to you? were you saying to people if you are jobless today the president has failinged you and you should vote against him and vote for change in the presidency? >> well, what i was saying was the old recovery -- mantra, to do the same thing over and over and over and expect different change is called insanity. we spent $2 billion on an election that nothing changed. same congress, same senate same president. so should we expect change? i'm not that sure. >> therefore the re-election of president obama was a good thing or bad thing you think? >> well, i don't ever get into politics as you know, charlie. i've always said i'm not right wing or left wing, i'm for the whole bird. >> evidently, god wanted president obama, he had a purpose for him, to be re-elected. do i follow that? what's the disconnect between those t
. of course, the big story of this election is sometimes you lose the forest for the trees is president obama won. and won not just in a race that everyone said was going to be razor thin, it was going to be super close. he ends up winning with 52% of the vote, we now know. one of only five presidents in history that's won more than 50% in two successive elections. >> and it's not even close when it comes to the swing states. we were looking at these 9, 10, 11 swing states until the end of the year and it wasn't even close. >> an historic, big victory for him, one that portends a lot for those who elected him. latinos, women, young voters, asians, this is what the future looks like and his victory showed it. on the other side, beyond his victory was, of course, mitt romney's loss. and there's probably no single moment that signified everything that was problematic with romney's candidacy more than the 47% video. he had been painted by his own words and by president obama's team as a heartless, out of touch plutocrat. that image had stuck to him and had made it very difficult for him to be suc
to george w. bush, 79- 93% of the residential nominees were confirmed. under president obama's administration, a discipline not right for the senate to just block nominations and never vote on them. but that has become part of the routine obstructure. i do not think robert byrd would have put up with that. that is a change. -- should be changed. there is a story that illustrates so much of what david said about byrd being a complex figure. senator byrd was extremely complex. he is a very proud man. he was very sure and how he wanted to be treated. he had this relationship with carter. they worked together on a lot of things. that relationship was torn the night of the hostage rescue mission. senator byrd was in the white house that night at the oval office of carter. carter outlined the idea of the mission without telling byrd. that was such a betrayal, it was simply a horrible mistake by carter to have not told senator byrd, who had done so much for him. that tore the relationship. >> byrd worked so hard for carter and for carter not to tell him, you're absolutely right. he
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5